Prejmerean, Mihaela Cornelia and Vasilache, Simona (2007): Standards and markets for university-originated organizational intelligence.
Download (191kB) | Preview
The aim of this paper is to bring to discussion ways to diagnose university’s organizational intelligence and to put forward some ways of measuring it. The main steps pursued refer to defining and describing the organizational particularities of universities, which modulate in specific ways organizational intelligence strategies implementation, applying the organizational intelligence standards to universities, and examining the features of the intelligence markets. The manner in which the paradigm of the traditional university is being changed, and finally eliminated, by the social stimuli which claim for a different type of intelligence originating in universities and which are the beneficiaries of the new model of university, as an organization in-between – preserving its idiosyncratic position, but engaging in mutually profitable alliances, is an issue we address to.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Institution:||Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest|
|Original Title:||Standards and markets for university-originated organizational intelligence|
|English Title:||Standards and markets for university-originated organizational intelligence|
|Keywords:||organizational intelligence; academic strategic management; intelligence markets|
|Subjects:||I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I2 - Education and Research Insititutions > I21 - Analysis of Education
Z - Other Special Topics > Z1 - Cultural Economics; Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology > Z13 - Economic Sociology; Economic Anthropology; Social and Economic Stratification
I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I2 - Education and Research Insititutions > I23 - Higher Education Research Institutions
|Depositing User:||simona vasilache|
|Date Deposited:||05. Nov 2007|
|Last Modified:||11. Feb 2013 18:23|
1. Albrecht, K. (2005) Social Intelligence. The New Science of Success, Wiley, John & Sons Inc. 2. Argyris, C. (1999) On Organizational Learning. 2nd Edition. London: Blackwell Business. 3. Aronowitz, S (2000) The Knowledge Factory: dismantling the corporate university and creating true higher learning. Boston: Beacon Press 4. Baldridge, J.V., Julius, D.J., Pfeffer, J. (2000) Power failure in administrative environments in Academic Leadership 11 (1) [on-line] at http://www.academicleadership.org 5. Becher, T., Trowler, P. (2001) Academic Tribes and Territories, Open University Press: Buckingham 6. Birnbaum, R. (1988) How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organization and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass 7. Dean, T. L., Boddy, M. (1988) An analysis of time-dependent planning. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) 8. Bontis, N. (1999) Managing organizational knowledge by diagnosing intellectual capital: framing and advancing the state of the field, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 18 No. 5161718, pp. 433-62. 9. Bourdieu, P., Johnson, R. (1993) The field of cultural production: essays on art and literature, NY: Columbia University Press 10. Bratianu, C., Lefter, V. (2001) Management strategic universitar. Bucuresti: Rao 11. Brunsson, N., Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2000) Constructing Organizations: The Example of Public Sector Reform Organizational Studies, 21 (4), 721-746 12. Burke, J.C. (2002) Funding Public Colleges and Universities for Performance. Albany, NY: Rockefeller Institute Press. 13. Caddy, I. (2000) Intellectual Capital: recognizing both assets and liabilities, Journal of Intellectual Capital, I (2), 129-146. 14. Calota, G. (2004) Metode de proiectare si dimensionare a invatamantului din Romania, PhD thesis. 15. Clark, K. (1996) The employment of the university graduates in the United States: the Acropolis and the Agora, in Ladislav Cerych, Alain Bienaymé & Guy Neave (Eds.), La Professionalisation de l’Enseignement Supérior, Paris/ Amsterdam, Institut européen d’Education et de Politique sociale, Fondation européene de la Culture. 16. Clark, B.R. (1998) Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation, in Higher Education, 38 (3), 373-374. 17. Clegg, S., Steel, J. (2002) The emperor's new clothes: globalisation and e-learning. British Journal of Sociology of Education 18. Cohen, W., Florida, R., Randazzese, L., Walsh, J. (1998) Industry and the academy: Uneasy partners in the cause of technological advance, in Roger G. Noll, (ed.), Challenges to Research Universities, Washington: Brooking Institution Press 19. Edvinsson, L. (2002) Corporate Longitude. London: Pearson Education. 20. Edvinsson, L., Malone, M.S. (1997) Intellectual Capital: Realizing Your Company’s True Value by Finding Its Hidden Roots, NY: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc. 21. Etzkowitz, H. (2002) The Triple Helix: MIT and the Rise of Entrepreneurial Science, London:Gordon and Breach 22. Etzkowitz, H., Leydesdorff, L. (Eds.) (2002). Universities and the Global Knowledge Economy: A Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations. London: Continuum. 23. Fazlagic, A. (2005) Measuring the Intellectual Capital of a University. In: Trends in the Management of Human Resources in Higher Education. Retrieved June 14, 2007, from www.oecd.org/dataoecd/56/16/35322785.pdf 24. Forest, J.F. (2002). Learning organizations: Higher education institutions can work smarter too. Connection, 17(2), 31-33 25. Gafencu, M. (2005) Strategii ale dezvoltarii invatamantului superior, PhD thesis. 26. Gibbons, M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge. London: Thousand Oaks 27. Harris, L.C., Ogbonna, E. (2001) Leadership Style and Market Orientation: An Empirical Study, European Journal of Marketing, 35 (5/6), 744-764. 28. Hirsch, F. (1977) Social Limits to Growth Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 29. Holland, J.H. (1975). Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. 30. Krücken, G. (2006) Innovationsmythen in Politik und Gesselschaft, in Scherzberg, A. (Hrsg.) Kluges Entscheiden. Disziplinäre Grundlagen und Interdisziplinäre Verknüpfungen. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck 31. Leitner K-H. Intellectual Capital Reporting for Universities: Conceptual background and application within the reorganization of Austrian universities, 2002. Retrieved October 20, 2006, from systemforschung.arcs.ac.at/Publikationen/11.pdf 32. Leitner K-H. ,Intellectual Capital Reporting in Research Organizations and Universities: Recent Developments in Austria, OECD Conference „Intellectual Assets and Innovation: Value Creation in the Knowledge Economy”, Ferrara, October 2005, Retrived October, 23, 2006, from http://www.ferraraonintangibles.net/OECD FerraraIntangiblesConference/index.php?cat=16&proceedings=3b 33. Lyotard, J-F. (2004). Anamnesis: Of the Visible. Theory, Culture & Society, 21 (1), 107-119. 34. James, R. & McInnis, C. (2001). Strategically Re-positioning Student Assessment [Internet], Discussion paper for the AUTC project ‘Assessing Student Learning’. http://www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au. Accessed 12 April 2002. 35. Jensen, R. Thursby, M.C. The Academic Effects of Patentable Research, 29 December, Mimeo, (2002) 36. Mertins, K., P. Heisig, and J. Vorbeck. (2003) Knowledge management, concepts and best practices. 2nd edition. New York: Springer. 37. McInnis, C. (2001). Signs of disengagement: The changing undergraduate experience in Australian universities [Internet], Centre for the Study of Higher Education. http://www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au. Accessed November 3, 2006. 38. Mintzberg, H. (1979). The Structuring of Organizations: A Synthesis of the Research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 39. Neave, G. (2002). Anything Goes: Or: How the Accommodation of Europe's Universities to European Integration Integrates an Inspiring Number of Contradictions. Tertiary Education and Management, 8(3), 178-191. 40. Newman, F., Couturier, L. (2001). Privileges Lost, Responsibilities Gained: Reconstructing Higher Education. Boston: Futures Project. 41. Power, M. (1997). The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification. Oxford: Oxford University Press 42. Prejmerean, M. (2006) Universities in the Free-Market Economy. Strategies for their Marketing, Revista de Management si Inginerie Economica, 6 (4). 43. Rado, P. (2001) Transition in Education. Budapest: Open Society Institute. 44. Readings, B. (1996) The University in Ruins. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. 45. Roos, G. and J. Roos. 1997. Measuring your company’s intellectual performance. Long Range Planning 30(3), 413–26. 46. Samuelson, P. A. (1954). The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure, in Review of Economics and Statistics, 36, 387-389 47. Sanchez M.P., Elena S., Castrillo R., Intellectual Capital Management and Reporting for Universities: Usefulness, Comparability and Diffusion, (extended abstract). Retrieved January, 19, 2006, from www.ticinoricerca.ch/conference/abstracts/sanchez_abstract.pdf. Paper presented at the International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators. History and New Perspectives, Lugano 15-17 November 2006. 48. Segura, D.A., Mudge S., Bratianu, C., Jianu, I., Valcea, S. (2006) Quality Improvement of Business Education in Romanian Universities. The Student as Customer and Client, in Proceedings of the International Conference “35 Years of Marketing in Romania. 49. Stephan, P., Gurmu, S., Sumell, A. J., Black, G. (2002) Individual patenting and publication activity: Having one’s cake and eating it too, paper prepared for the conference Rethinking science policy: Analytical frameworks for evidence-based policy, held on 21-23 March, at SPRU,Brighton 50. Strober, M. (2006) Habits of the Mind: Challenges for Multidisciplinary Engagement. Social Epistemology, 20 (3-4), 315-331 51. Tassey, G., 2005. Underinvestment in public good technologies. Journal of Technology Transfer, 30, 89–113